Neutrino Disconnect

[graybear13]

I will start with a few axioms that will justify my logic   First and foremost is a quote from Albert Einstein " We cannot solve our problems with the same thinking that we used when we created them."  Second, there is no evidence of a gravitational attraction between masses.  Third, dark matter is not matter at all.  It is a field of pre-atomic emergent energy particles (neutrinos).  Finally there was no big bang that started atomic creation. Atomic creation started with zero point energy (neutrinos) organizing themselves, through gravitational collapse and electronic organization into atoms.  Heat is a byproduct of atomic activity built up over billions of years.  The cosmos is much older than we think.  

 

At this point in time science sees no connection between neutrinos and atoms.  I posit that there is the ultimate connection in that atoms are electronically organized neutrinos.  Why else would neutrinos be given off when atoms break down for one reason or another?

 

The process of organizing neutrinos into atoms is the missing piece of the puzzle.  

 

How does a flow of neutrinos collapse and condense to the point at which an active nucleus is created? And once an active nucleus begins to project a positive charge, how is that contained and supported by the flow of neutrinos? 

 

Every atom of a mass exerts a pull on the field of neutrinos to feed its atomic activity.  We know that neutrinos have no direct influence on the atoms of a mass as they pass through, but there is an indirect push or nudge on the atoms of, for example, my body because they pull in neutrinos that are moving toward earth in order to feed and support their active nuclei.  If the flow of neutrinos stops, the nucleus will die.  The experiment to measure the nudge on my atoms is the easiest experiment in the world, just hop on a scale.  The result of a 100 trillion (or so) tiny nudges per second is your weight.  

 

If we can find a way to feed the atoms of our bodies from a source of neutrinos that are not moving toward earth there would be no nudge toward earth on each of my atoms therefore I would weightless in relation to earths gravitational field.

 

How to create a warp in the flow of dark matter that can redirect the flow of neutrinos toward the center of the warp is a problem that can be solved with this 'new way of thinking' about gravity. 

 

In my view the missing neutrinos coming from the sun is equal to the number of neutrinos that are absorbed by the planet and the life on it.  All of which must be fed energy in order to continue to exist. 

 

Neutrinos are raining down on earth from outer space ( dark matter), riding in on light beams from the sun and cycling through atoms; negative charge pulling them in and positive pushing them out.  The flow of neutrinos being incessantly pulled in by a mass is linear gravity.     

[exchemist]

22 minutes ago, graybear13 said:

I will start with a few axioms that will justify my logic   First and foremost is a quote from Albert Einstein " We cannot solve our problems with the same thinking that we used when we created them."  Second, there is no evidence of a gravitational attraction between masses.  Third, dark matter is not matter at all.  It is a field of pre-atomic emergent energy particles (neutrinos).  Finally there was no big bang that started atomic creation. Atomic creation started with zero point energy (neutrinos) organizing themselves, through gravitational collapse and electronic organization into atoms.  Heat is a byproduct of atomic activity built up over billions of years.  The cosmos is much older than we think.  

 

At this point in time science sees no connection between neutrinos and atoms.  I posit that there is the ultimate connection in that atoms are electronically organized neutrinos.  Why else would neutrinos be given off when atoms break down for one reason or another?

 

The process of organizing neutrinos into atoms is the missing piece of the puzzle.  

 

How does a flow of neutrinos collapse and condense to the point at which an active nucleus is created? And once an active nucleus begins to project a positive charge, how is that contained and supported by the flow of neutrinos? 

 

Every atom of a mass exerts a pull on the field of neutrinos to feed its atomic activity.  We know that neutrinos have no direct influence on the atoms of a mass as they pass through, but there is an indirect push or nudge on the atoms of, for example, my body because they pull in neutrinos that are moving toward earth in order to feed and support their active nuclei.  If the flow of neutrinos stops, the nucleus will die.  The experiment to measure the nudge on my atoms is the easiest experiment in the world, just hop on a scale.  The result of a 100 trillion (or so) tiny nudges per second is your weight.  

 

If we can find a way to feed the atoms of our bodies from a source of neutrinos that are not moving toward earth there would be no nudge toward earth on each of my atoms therefore I would weightless in relation to earths gravitational field.

 

How to create a warp in the flow of dark matter that can redirect the flow of neutrinos toward the center of the warp is a problem that can be solved with this 'new way of thinking' about gravity. 

 

In my view the missing neutrinos coming from the sun is equal to the number of neutrinos that are absorbed by the planet and the life on it.  All of which must be fed energy in order to continue to exist. 

 

Neutrinos are raining down on earth from outer space ( dark matter), riding in on light beams from the sun and cycling through atoms; negative charge pulling them in and positive pushing them out.  The flow of neutrinos being incessantly pulled in by a mass is linear gravity.     

This looks quite mad. To pick two of the most obviously wrong-headed assertions:-

- There obviously is evidence, all around us, of attraction between masses. If there were not, what would stop objects on the Earth's surface, including you, from floating off? Invisible velcro?

- Zero point energy has nothing to do with neutrinos. It is a quantum mechanical concept that in many bound states there is a ground state which has a non-zero energy associated with it. For instance, you have zero point energy the electronic ground state of an atom. You also have zero point energy in the ground vibrational state of a molecule. No neutrinos involved. 

 

 

Edited February 23, 2023 by exchemist

[joigus]

32 minutes ago, graybear13 said:

I will start with a few axioms that will justify my logic   First and foremost is a quote from Albert Einstein " We cannot solve our problems with the same thinking that we used when we created them."  Second, there is no evidence of a gravitational attraction between masses.  Third, dark matter is not matter at all.  It is a field of pre-atomic emergent energy particles (neutrinos).  Finally there was no big bang that started atomic creation. Atomic creation started with zero point energy (neutrinos) organizing themselves, through gravitational collapse and electronic organization into atoms.  Heat is a byproduct of atomic activity built up over billions of years.  The cosmos is much older than we think.  

 

At this point in time science sees no connection between neutrinos and atoms.  I posit that there is the ultimate connection in that atoms are electronically organized neutrinos.  Why else would neutrinos be given off when atoms break down for one reason or another?

 

The process of organizing neutrinos into atoms is the missing piece of the puzzle.  

 

How does a flow of neutrinos collapse and condense to the point at which an active nucleus is created? And once an active nucleus begins to project a positive charge, how is that contained and supported by the flow of neutrinos? 

 

Every atom of a mass exerts a pull on the field of neutrinos to feed its atomic activity.  We know that neutrinos have no direct influence on the atoms of a mass as they pass through, but there is an indirect push or nudge on the atoms of, for example, my body because they pull in neutrinos that are moving toward earth in order to feed and support their active nuclei.  If the flow of neutrinos stops, the nucleus will die.  The experiment to measure the nudge on my atoms is the easiest experiment in the world, just hop on a scale.  The result of a 100 trillion (or so) tiny nudges per second is your weight.  

 

If we can find a way to feed the atoms of our bodies from a source of neutrinos that are not moving toward earth there would be no nudge toward earth on each of my atoms therefore I would weightless in relation to earths gravitational field.

 

How to create a warp in the flow of dark matter that can redirect the flow of neutrinos toward the center of the warp is a problem that can be solved with this 'new way of thinking' about gravity. 

 

In my view the missing neutrinos coming from the sun is equal to the number of neutrinos that are absorbed by the planet and the life on it.  All of which must be fed energy in order to continue to exist. 

 

Neutrinos are raining down on earth from outer space ( dark matter), riding in on light beams from the sun and cycling through atoms; negative charge pulling them in and positive pushing them out.  The flow of neutrinos being incessantly pulled in by a mass is linear gravity.     

Absolutely non-sensical piece of WAG pseudo-reasoning. You obviously don't understand what gravity and mass --inertial or gravitational-- are. You obviously don't understand what electric charge is. You obviously don't understand what zero-point energy is.

And, BTW, axioms never justify your logic. Axioms are initial assumptions, and logic is a given.

[swansont]

!

Moderator Note

We require some combination of mathematical model, testable predictions and evidence. Assertion is not enough

 

[MigL]

1 hour ago, graybear13 said:

The experiment to measure the nudge on my atoms is the easiest experiment in the world, just hop on a scale.  The result of a 100 trillion (or so) tiny nudges per second is your weight.  

Are these same neutrinos not hitting the nucleii in your body when you go skydiving ?
Yet you are weightless in free-fall.

By the way, what is an 'active' nucleus as opposed to a 'dead' one ?
( is February 'crank' month ? )

[Genady]

17 minutes ago, MigL said:

is February 'crank' month ?

If it is, at least it's short.

[exchemist]

48 minutes ago, MigL said:

Are these same neutrinos not hitting the nucleii in your body when you go skydiving ?
Yet you are weightless in free-fall.

By the way, what is an 'active' nucleus as opposed to a 'dead' one ?
( is February 'crank' month ? )

I was wondering that.

[Markus Hanke]

15 hours ago, graybear13 said:

Second, there is no evidence of a gravitational attraction between masses.

The evidence for the existence of a gravitational attraction between masses is so overwhelming that it is entirely beyond any contention. Using the Cavendish setup, you can even perform experiments that show you this right at home in your living room. I recommend you give it a try - you can purchase DIY kits for this right off the Internet at a cheap price. Some of these come with spheres made of different materials - metal, stone, high-density plastics etc -, and some are even enclosed in vacuum chambers and Faraday cages, so that you can confirm yourself that these effects are not the result of any electromagnetic interactions, air movements etc.

Gravity is very much real, and it is very easy to show that it is.

[graybear13]

On 2/23/2023 at 12:59 PM, joigus said:

Absolutely non-sensical piece of WAG pseudo-reasoning. You obviously don't understand what gravity and mass --inertial or gravitational-- are. You obviously don't understand what electric charge is. You obviously don't understand what zero-point energy is.

And, BTW, axioms never justify your logic. Axioms are initial assumptions, and logic is a given.

My initial assumptions are correct and my logic is sound. 

On 2/23/2023 at 1:00 PM, swansont said:

!

Moderator Note

We require some combination of mathematical model, testable predictions and evidence. Assertion is not enough

 

With all due respect, dependence on mathematics as the only way to move forward is a big part of the problem with physics.  A little bit of common sense is what is needed.  It's as if we have given up the ability to visualize a way forward.  Math has led us into a blind ally with nothing ahead but a dead end.  

 

I don't have the ability to speak the language of mathematics, but I can see how math was used to create a primeval atom that Einstein went along with, reversing his math in time to eventually send us chasing wild geese up a blind ally.  Big bang is BS  (bad science).  So there will be no math.  I can prove what I say to be true by experiment, but there is no interest (yet) in funding experiments that could prove big bang to be BS.  

 

I know I am in the land of giants who believe that I have come to steal the goose that lays golden eggs (big bang).  Not so.  I have come to show you how to access unlimited clean energy, but it will take a major rewire of the current thinking about a few things.  

On 2/23/2023 at 2:26 PM, MigL said:

Are these same neutrinos not hitting the nucleii in your body when you go skydiving ?
Yet you are weightless in free-fall.

By the way, what is an 'active' nucleus as opposed to a 'dead' one ?
( is February 'crank' month ? )

Thank you for the insult.  It means a lot coming from someone who thinks that if you jump out of an airplane you become weightless. If that were the case you wouldn't need a parachute to keep earth's gravity from smashing you like a bug when you hit the ground.  Linear gravity is the movement of neutrinos through your body pushing you down if you are in the air, on the ground or in a cavern under the ground. 

 

The charged protons and uncharged neutrons of the nucleus of an atom are held together by the reciprocating force of the Mesotron.  If Mesotron is destroyed this will facilitate all sorts of atomic breakup and material disintegration

[Genady]

48 minutes ago, graybear13 said:

My initial assumptions are correct and my logic is sound. 

With all due respect, dependence on mathematics as the only way to move forward is a big part of the problem with physics.  A little bit of common sense is what is needed.  It's as if we have given up the ability to visualize a way forward.  Math has led us into a blind ally with nothing ahead but a dead end.  

 

I don't have the ability to speak the language of mathematics, but I can see how math was used to create a primeval atom that Einstein went along with, reversing his math in time to eventually send us chasing wild geese up a blind ally.  Big bang is BS  (bad science).  So there will be no math.  I can prove what I say to be true by experiment, but there is no interest (yet) in funding experiments that could prove big bang to be BS.  

 

I know I am in the land of giants who believe that I have come to steal the goose that lays golden eggs (big bang).  Not so.  I have come to show you how to access unlimited clean energy, but it will take a major rewire of the current thinking about a few things.  

Thank you for the insult.  It means a lot coming from someone who thinks that if you jump out of an airplane you become weightless. If that were the case you wouldn't need a parachute to keep earth's gravity from smashing you like a bug when you hit the ground.  Linear gravity is the movement of neutrinos through your body pushing you down if you are in the air, on the ground or in a cavern under the ground. 

 

The charged protons and uncharged neutrons of the nucleus of an atom are held together by the reciprocating force of the Mesotron.  If Mesotron is destroyed this will facilitate all sorts of atomic breakup and material disintegration

OK. I am convinced. You can go now.

[MigL]

40 minutes ago, graybear13 said:

Thank you for the insult.  It means a lot coming from someone who thinks that if you jump out of an airplane you become weightless. If that were the case you wouldn't need a parachute to keep earth's gravity from smashing you like a bug when you hit the ground. 

Seems the insult is well deserved; I didn't say 'massless', I said 'weightless' ( big dfference ).

Tell you what; let's do a little experiment ...
Next time you go sky diving, bring a bathroom scale with you.
As you are falling, place it under your feet.

If it reads anything other than zero, I will publicly apologize to you.
If it reads zero, you will publicly admit you are a 'crank'.

Deal ?

[swansont]

3 hours ago, graybear13 said:

So there will be no math

!

Moderator Note

Then there is no thread. Don’t bring the topic up again.